Karesh v. Shell-On Sol-Ted Peanut Co.

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that the “injury discovery” rule is the accrual rule for a civil RICO claim
• concluding that statute of limitations began to run when plaintiff filed an adversary complaint in a related bankruptcy proceeding and rejecting notion that more recent acts inflicted any new injury
• concluding that statute of limitations began to run when plaintiff filed an adversary complaint in a related bankruptcy proceeding and rejecting notion that more recent acts inflicted any new injury
• finding that acts part of the same corporate scheme are not “new and independent”
• finding that acts part of the same corporate scheme are not “new and independent”
• reasoning that “[t]he plaintiff need not discover that the injury is part of a ‘pattern of racketeering’ for the period to begin to run” and “a plaintiffs cause of action can accrue before he discovers all elements of the cause of action exist.” (citations omitted)

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).